Speedy Vindication for Rosli Dahlan remains uncertain despite moral victory
Another Moral Victory for Rosli Dahlan yet vindication remains uncertain
By Din Merican
I was in Court on December 23, 2009 (Day 3 of Lawyer Rosli Dahlan’s trial) when the Sessions Court ruled that Rosli’s counsel can pursue the line of questions that would disclose whether DPP Kevin Anthony Morais had acted in bad faith (mala fide) when he issued the s. 32 Notices against Rosli.
After making that ruling on Day 3, the trial was aborted because Kevin had to fly off to England for his Christmas holidays. Little did Kevin Morais realise that he was in for a very tough time when he comes back from his Christmas holidays, as that ruling opened up the floodgates for Dato’ Kumaraendran to pose very piercing questions when the trial resumed again. That was exactly what happened to Kevin Morais, who is also the MACC’s Deputy Director of Legal and Prosecution Division, when the trial resumed on Day 4 and Day 5 ( January 5 and 6, 2010).
Under cross-examination from Dato’ Kumaraendran, Kevin readily admitted that Rosli was just a witness who could help in the investigation and was never a suspect himself. Therefore, one wonders what was the reason for the mistreatment and public humiliation that Rosli received at the hands of the MACC (then ACA) when he was roughed up and hastily charged just one day before Hari Raya Aidilfitri of 2007. The trauma that his family suffered is evident every time I saw his wife and three children during Rosli’s trial.
Kevin also became increasingly evasive when it was shown that Rosli had fully co-operated with the MACC (then ACA), that Rosli had filed a Statement Under Oath as required, and that he also had politely asked for certain clarifications which Kevin arrogantly turned down. The grueling cross–examination then showed that despite the investigations against Dato’ Ramli Yusuff were incomplete, Kevin had issued a s. 32(1)(a) Notice against Dato’ Ramli which was the fait accompli that the MACC needed to cause Dato’ Ramli to be interdicted, charged and excluded from the succession line in PDRM to be the IGP. That is how IGP Musa Hassan makes himself appear indispensable such that his service must be extended because none in the present echelon are suitable or ready to be IGP after him.
